Literature DB >> 29775218

Unilateral movement preparation causes task-specific modulation of TMS responses in the passive, opposite limb.

Lilian Chye1, Stephan Riek1, Aymar de Rugy1,2, Richard G Carson1,3,4, Timothy J Carroll1.   

Abstract

KEY POINTS: Activity in the primary motor cortices of both hemispheres increases during unilateral movement preparation, but the functional role of ipsilateral motor cortex activity is unknown. Ipsilateral motor cortical activity could represent subliminal 'motor planning' for the passive limb. Alternatively, it could represent the state of the active limb, to support coordination between the limbs should a bimanual movement be required. Here we assessed how preparation of forces toward different directions, with the left wrist, alters evoked responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation of left motor cortex. Preparation of a unilateral movement caused excitability increases in ipsilateral motor cortex that reflected forces produced with the active limb in an intrinsic (body-centred), rather than an extrinsic (world-centred), coordinate system. These results suggest that ipsilateral motor cortical activity prior to unilateral action reflects the state of the active limb, rather than subliminal motor planning for the passive limb. ABSTRACT: Corticospinal excitability is modulated for muscles on both sides of the body during unilateral movement preparation. For the effector, there is a progressive increase in excitability, and a shift in direction of muscle twitches evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) toward the impending movement. By contrast, the directional characteristics of excitability changes in the opposite (passive) limb have not been fully characterized. Here we assessed how preparation of voluntary forces towards four spatially distinct visual targets with the left wrist alters muscle twitches and motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited by TMS of left motor cortex. MEPs were facilitated significantly more in muscles homologous to agonist rather than antagonist muscles in the active limb, from 120 ms prior to voluntary EMG onset. Thus, unilateral motor preparation has a directionally specific influence on pathways projecting to the opposite limb that corresponds to the active muscles rather than the direction of movement in space. The directions of TMS-evoked twitches also deviated toward the impending force direction of the active limb, according to muscle-based coordinates, following the onset of voluntary EMG. The data indicate that preparation of a unilateral movement increases task-dependent excitability in ipsilateral motor cortex, or its downstream projections, that reflects the forces applied by the active limb in an intrinsic (body-centred), rather than an extrinsic (world-centred), coordinate system. The results suggest that ipsilateral motor cortical activity prior to unilateral action reflects the state of the active limb, rather than subliminal motor planning for the passive limb.
© 2018 The Authors. The Journal of Physiology © 2018 The Physiological Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  coordinate system; ipsilateral motor cortex; motor preparation

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29775218      PMCID: PMC6092291          DOI: 10.1113/JP275433

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Physiol        ISSN: 0022-3751            Impact factor:   5.182


  63 in total

1.  Changes in segmental and motor cortical output with contralateral muscle contractions and altered sensory inputs in humans.

Authors:  Tibor Hortobágyi; Janet L Taylor; Nicolas T Petersen; Gabrielle Russell; Simon C Gandevia
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Vision modulates corticospinal suppression in a functionally specific manner during movement of the opposite limb.

Authors:  Richard G Carson; Kathy L Ruddy
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-01-11       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Response competition in the primary motor cortex: corticospinal excitability reflects response replacement during simple decisions.

Authors:  Thomas Michelet; Gary H Duncan; Paul Cisek
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2010-05-05       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Role of corticospinal suppression during motor preparation.

Authors:  Julie Duque; Richard B Ivry
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2009-01-06       Impact factor: 5.357

5.  Mechanisms underlying functional changes in the primary motor cortex ipsilateral to an active hand.

Authors:  Monica A Perez; Leonardo G Cohen
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2008-05-28       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Irradiation of voluntary activity to the contralateral side in movements of normal subjects and patients with central motor disturbances.

Authors:  H C Hopf; H J Schlegel; K Lowitzsch
Journal:  Eur Neurol       Date:  1974       Impact factor: 1.710

7.  Changes in wrist muscle activity with forearm posture: implications for the study of sensorimotor transformations.

Authors:  Aymar de Rugy; Rahman Davoodi; Timothy J Carroll
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-09-12       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Evidence for two concurrent inhibitory mechanisms during response preparation.

Authors:  Julie Duque; David Lew; Riccardo Mazzocchio; Etienne Olivier; Richard B Ivry
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2010-03-10       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Cortical representation of ipsilateral arm movements in monkey and man.

Authors:  Karunesh Ganguly; Lavi Secundo; Gireeja Ranade; Amy Orsborn; Edward F Chang; Dragan F Dimitrov; Jonathan D Wallis; Nicholas M Barbaro; Robert T Knight; Jose M Carmena
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2009-10-14       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  Neural mechanisms underlying the changes in ipsilateral primary motor cortex excitability during unilateral rhythmic muscle contraction.

Authors:  Kazumasa Uehara; Takuya Morishita; Shinji Kubota; Kozo Funase
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  2012-11-19       Impact factor: 3.332

View more
  2 in total

1.  Influence of kinesthetic motor imagery and effector specificity on the long-latency stretch response.

Authors:  Christopher J Forgaard; Ian M Franks; Dana Maslovat; Romeo Chua
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2019-09-25       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 2.  Inhibition for gain modulation in the motor system.

Authors:  Ian Greenhouse
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2022-03-26       Impact factor: 1.972

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.